Horizons FDev, please talk to the active PVP community.

[Kneejo]

If you don't like the pvp aspect, play the pve mode.

What the heck? How can you read that in my post? I never said I don't like PVP.. really.. read it again.. and forget your prejudice about me.. it taints your perception.

I don't like the way Etherimp presents himself, that's all.. now flame me,.. it's what you do best, silly human

 

[Etherimp]

Remember the Python and how great it was for combat, defense, trading and exploration with longer range. Enter the PvP complaints per how it was too hard to defeat in combat. So it was reduced to the limited version it is now. So much for the PvE fans who lost a ship with great loadout possibilities. This scenario has been repeated many times over for the primary balance concerns of PvP.

No, the issue seems more like let's discuss PvP and don't bother inviting PvE to the table.

The issues that I have in mind would actually benefit both PVE and PVP AND would make it so running something like an Asp or Type-9 would not be an automatic death sentence if you fitted it properly.


Basically, you're saying we should allow over-powered ships with no consideration for the impacts they have on PVP, because you liked how over-powered they were for PVE. Am I understanding that right? A ship was over-powered, it got nerfed, and both PVPers and PVEers suffered?

Again, I don't understand why you're afraid of game balance.

 

[Fendalton]

The Python was broken, and to an extent the DB Scout is getting close from powercreep.

CQC is something to do if you have a spare 20 minutes. The risk of loosing your big ships is what makes PvP amazing, where you can look at how you died and how you should do things differently for next time.

Even if the game allowed you to flag yourself for PvP like in WoW, where you typed /pvp on and people then knew you were up for it. Could be like that there, so if you target someone it says their name faction and PvP status.

THAT'S an idea.

 

[Etherimp]

The Python was broken, and to an extent the DB Scout is getting close from powercreep.

CQC is something to do if you have a spare 20 minutes. The risk of loosing your big ships is what makes PvP amazing, where you can look at how you died and how you should do things differently for next time.

Even if the game allowed you to flag yourself for PvP like in WoW, where you typed /pvp on and people then knew you were up for it. Could be like that there, so if you target someone it says their name faction and PvP status.

THAT'S an idea.

They have that. It's called "Solo"

 

[Fendalton]

They have that. It's called "Solo"

The spare 20 minutes thing? I don't follow.

PvP is my most favourite thing in the game, it's the only true display of skill.

 

[h347h]

Big ship combat is fun and the risk of losing that ship is one of the most adrenaline pumping feelings their is.

Not by a long shot. I used to be a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne, a VIDEO GAME does not even get me the least bit in the adrenaline line.

If you can't play with the big dogs in open and accept you might just lose your ship, stick to private or solo.

I can and do I am not impressed, the thing is I look down on the style of pvp. Just like I do 'world' pvp in WoW. And as for the 'big dogs' goes it is more like a few big fish in a small pond mentality. There are only a few of you in comparison to the total number of players playing.

 

[Etherimp]

The spare 20 minutes thing? I don't follow.

PvP is my most favourite thing in the game, it's the only true display of skill.

No.. The /pvp flag.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Not by a long shot. I used to be a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne, a VIDEO GAME does not even get me the least bit in the adrenaline line.



I can and do I am not impressed, the thing is I look down on the style of pvp. Just like I do 'world' pvp in WoW. And as for the 'big dogs' goes it is more like a few big fish in a small pond mentality. There are only a few of you in comparison to the total number of players playing.

There are more "good" PVP pilots in Open than there are in CQC, in my experience.

 

[h347h]

Exactly my point. And how would balancing the game around PvP change that?

This has everything to do with it! Are you kidding me. Every change to something for pvp is going to affect how NPCs perform. Then the PvE crowd will ask for changes which changes how PvP works. Then you continue to do iterative changes that constantly change the game often for the worse. Look at how the whole SCB thing ended up. It was a boring garbage mechanic that suited pvp well but made pve too easy. They changed it and then had to change it again to try and balance it for pvp. Which then AGAIN had to be changed a bit to stop unintentional mechanics like the stacking of small SCBs to get around heat. THEN pvers were not happy with the way hull reinforcement packages were presented and wanted them buffed. Thankfully that didn't happen as they are in a good spot of pvp.

Think back to how missiles used to be and how they are now. They were fine for pve but broken for pvp. Now they are garbage all around because they had to be changed for pvp. This stuff goes on and on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

No.. The /pvp flag.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -




There are more "good" PVP pilots in Open than there are in CQC, in my experience.

That might be because you are still low on the MMR ladder in CQC...

http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2015/02/15/reliable-vaccine-treat-dunning-krueger-syndrome/

 

[Etherimp]

This has everything to do with it! Are you kidding me. Every change to something for pvp is going to affect how NPCs perform. Then the PvE crowd will ask for changes which changes how PvP works. Then you continue to do iterative changes that constantly change the game often for the worse. Look at how the whole SCB thing ended up. It was a boring garbage mechanic that suited pvp well but made pve too easy. They changed it and then had to change it again to try and balance it for pvp. Which then AGAIN had to be changed a bit to stop unintentional mechanics like the stacking of small SCBs to get around heat. THEN pvers were not happy with the way hull reinforcement packages were presented and wanted them buffed. Thankfully that didn't happen as they are in a good spot of pvp.

Think back to how missiles used to be and how they are now. They were fine for pve but broken for pvp. Now they are garbage all around because they had to be changed for pvp. This stuff goes on and on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



That might be because you are still low on the MMR ladder in CQC...

http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2015/02/15/reliable-vaccine-treat-dunning-krueger-syndrome/

The fact is this game has never been balanced for PVP, or PVE, because FDev hasn't yet showed that they know how to balance the game, so drawing from the experience of this game is not valid.

As far as CQC.. Please show me evidence of this MMR ladder. I've seen no evidence that it actually exist.


Also, the majority of the good PVPers from Open don't play CQC. I hardly doubt they'd have a problem with it if they did.

 

[Hooplah]

......Basically, you're saying we should allow over-powered ships with no consideration for the impacts they have on PVP, because you liked how over-powered they were for PVE. Am I understanding that right? A ship was over-powered, it got nerfed, and both PVPers and PVEers suffered? Again, I don't understand why you're afraid of game balance.

No, you are saying that a ship is over-powered solely based on it's singular PvP application and the balance that always comes first. Let's don't consider that the same ship is totally acceptable in the PvE environment with more loadout opportunities and resultant satisfaction with the game. PvP seems to always come first. Even jump range is nerfed because of the advantage it would give bounty hunters Interdicting other players. Thus forget a decent jump range for a PvE trader or explorer.

I am not afraid of game balance as you are trying to infer...only those who attempt to redirect my comments to their own satisfaction and state that I am. Balance will always be a part of the game. It could be a lot better if PvP had to work a little harder with a few concessions to the PvE exploration community. Balance is about both, not just PvP.

 

[Chance-]

This has everything to do with it! Are you kidding me. Every change to something for pvp is going to affect how NPCs perform. Then the PvE crowd will ask for changes which changes how PvP works. Then you continue to do iterative changes that constantly change the game often for the worse. Look at how the whole SCB thing ended up. It was a boring garbage mechanic that suited pvp well but made pve too easy. They changed it and then had to change it again to try and balance it for pvp. Which then AGAIN had to be changed a bit to stop unintentional mechanics like the stacking of small SCBs to get around heat. THEN pvers were not happy with the way hull reinforcement packages were presented and wanted them buffed. Thankfully that didn't happen as they are in a good spot of pvp.

Think back to how missiles used to be and how they are now. They were fine for pve but broken for pvp. Now they are garbage all around because they had to be changed for pvp. This stuff goes on and on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



That might be because you are still low on the MMR ladder in CQC...

http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2015/02/15/reliable-vaccine-treat-dunning-krueger-syndrome/

You are not listening. PvPers could not care less about CQC. It means nothing. It is an offshoot that we don't play. It isn't what we want out of PvP.

 

[Soliluna]

This has everything to do with it! Are you kidding me. Every change to something for pvp is going to affect how NPCs perform. Then the PvE crowd will ask for changes which changes how PvP works. Then you continue to do iterative changes that constantly change the game often for the worse. Look at how the whole SCB thing ended up. It was a boring garbage mechanic that suited pvp well but made pve too easy. They changed it and then had to change it again to try and balance it for pvp. Which then AGAIN had to be changed a bit to stop unintentional mechanics like the stacking of small SCBs to get around heat. THEN pvers were not happy with the way hull reinforcement packages were presented and wanted them buffed. Thankfully that didn't happen as they are in a good spot of pvp.

Think back to how missiles used to be and how they are now. They were fine for pve but broken for pvp. Now they are garbage all around because they had to be changed for pvp. This stuff goes on and on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



That might be because you are still low on the MMR ladder in CQC...

http://blogs.agu.org/wildwildscience/2015/02/15/reliable-vaccine-treat-dunning-krueger-syndrome/

Have to agree with H347h, I'm very familiar with competitive PVP games, many years PVP in MMO's at the very top level, top PVE in WoW, lots of years of scrimming with the best in CS source, lots of playing with paid professionals in SC2,HotS, thousands of hours in Dota 2 4k+ MMR including with lots of well known faces.

PVP and PVE are two separate beasts and a change in one very strongly affects the other. Sometimes positively, often negatively.

 

[Hesson]

The day FDev listens to their fans is the day the remaining modicum of potential this game has gets thrown right out the window. It'll be grind, boredom and questionable pricing from then on.

 

[Etherimp]

Have to agree with H347h, I'm very familiar with competitive PVP games, many years PVP in MMO's at the very top level, top PVE in WoW, lots of years of scrimming with the best in CS source, lots of playing with paid professionals in SC2,HotS, thousands of hours in Dota 2 4k+ MMR including with lots of well known faces.

PVP and PVE are two separate beasts and a change in one very strongly affects the other. Sometimes positively, often negatively.

Played CS1.6 competitively for 7 years with/against some of the best teams in NA, including at LAN tournaments. Age of Empires III 2150 rating, World of Warcraft Arena 2400 rating.

Balancing ships for better PVP will do jack squat to PVE.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

It'll be grind, boredom and questionable pricing from then on.

I think that's already the state of the game.

 

[Jaeger]

God no this is awful. This ruins MMOs. You have a perfectly balanced PvP game for hardcore PvPers in CQC. The more you muck with PvP/PvE balance the poorer the game play will become like EVERY OTHER MMO to date that has tried to do it. It DOES NOT WORK.

What does not work is having PvP and PvE using the same rules in the same game mode. It ruins both, this is one of the fundamental flaws in the design of ED. They tried to do something new, which at the time I applauded. But it's clear that they should have gone down the tried and tested route of separate game modes. Not this solo vs open proven to be crapology, but a pvp flag and separate pvp equipment.

 

[Soliluna]

Played CS1.6 competitively for 7 years with/against some of the best teams in NA, including at LAN tournaments. Age of Empires III 2150 rating, World of Warcraft Arena 2400 rating.

Balancing ships for better PVP will do jack squat to PVE.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



I think that's already the state of the game.

Well, I was Gladiator and top 50 EU raider, if you believe PVP didn't affect PVE and vice versa you are sadly greatly mistaken.

 

[Etherimp]

Well, I was Gladiator and top 50 EU raider, if you believe PVP didn't affect PVE and vice versa you are sadly greatly mistaken.

Not saying it didn't. Don't see how it has anything to do with Elite Dangerous.

We are all flying the same ships.

All of the modules you can buy, I can buy.

How do the 2 even equate?

 

[SushiCW]

As far as CQC.. Please show me evidence of this MMR ladder. I've seen no evidence that it actually exist.

It's been basically turned off at this point. It was there for a while in force, but the consequence was that the most dedicated pilots quickly got to a point where the game wasn't ever able to find skill-ranked matches for them. They've since dialed it down.

Unfortunately CQC just doesn't have a big enough population consistently for strict MMR-based matchmaking. Which is a real shame, it's a lot of fun. I'm always sad to see "dedicated PvP pilots" refusing to even give it a shot. We need more dangerous pilots and less noob cannon fodder!

I'd go so far as to say that CQC has completely ruined open PvP for me. I've never cared for large ship combat, and have always preferred fast-paced fighter-on-fighter action. CQC delivers that. Open PvP does not. That might change once ship-launched fighters are a thing, but we'll see.

 

[Soliluna]

Not saying it didn't. Don't see how it has anything to do with Elite Dangerous.

We are all flying the same ships.

All of the modules you can buy, I can buy.

How do the 2 even equate?

You just pointed out exactly why it will affect PVP and PVE at the same time. Repeating what I said in my previous post, sometimes it's positive and often it's negative.

The recent SCB changes are a good example. In PVE they were being used by lots of CMDR's for longevity in farming RES sites or CZ's. Unfortunately they were also prolonging PVP encounters to the detriment of a lot of PVP players enjoyment. The change reflects a 'balancing' of the game that has affected both PVP and PVE one seen as positive and the other as negative.

I don't think focusing on one single playstyle exclusively is a good idea and I also don't think the 'PVP' crowd need to have a dialogue opened, in fact PVP players in my experience are typically the most biased players. Not to mention the community can already reach FD with suggestions through the appropriate channels.

I also don't think balance is what the game needs to achieve the most enjoyable experience for all players.

Regarding why CQC hasn't kicked off very well is (I think) because of it's balance. I don't think games benefit from "perfect" balance and I don't think PVP players have taken to it because it is "too" balanced, I think this makes the CQC mini-game become stale.

I'd like to explain it but I think Extra Credits explains it really well and offers some good examples:

[video=youtube;e31OSVZF77w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w[/video]

Rather than 'balance' I think the game needs more depth in it's choices and more rewards for making them. Hopefully looting and crafting will introduce some more choices that are not purely aesthetic (like the coloured lasers they described at EGX).

So again, I agree with H, CQC is balanced - and I agree with others who say 'look how popular it is'. It isn't, which is why I don't want balance in the main game.

 

[Etherimp]

I'd go so far as to say that CQC has completely ruined open PvP for me. I've never cared for large ship combat, and have always preferred fast-paced fighter-on-fighter action. CQC delivers that. Open PvP does not. That might change once ship-launched fighters are a thing, but we'll see.

I've done quite a bit of CQC. It's fun, but it's not nearly as rewarding as Open PVP for me.